6. Optional Innovation Decisions
• made by an individual
• decision made independent of others in a social system
• decisions can be influenced by norms, structure, or other factors
8. Stages in Collective Decision- Making
• 1. Stimulation – of interest in the need for the new idea (by stimulator)
• 2. Initiation – of the new idea in the social system ( by initiators)
• 3. Legitimation – of the idea in the social system ( by legitimizer)
• 4. Decision – to act ( by members of the social system)
• 5. Action or execution of the new idea.
9. Participation in Collective Decisions
• Participation
• Satisfaction
• Member acceptance of collective decisions
• Member cohesion
10. Authority Innovation Decisions
• decisions made by few individuals who possess power over others
• individual members have little or no influence on the decision
• individuals must implement the decision
12. Consequences of Innovations
• the changes that occur to an individual or to a social system as a result
of the adoption or rejection of an innovation
14. Desirable vs. Undesirable
• consequences depend on whether the effects of an innovation in a social
system are functional or dysfunctional
• Did the innovation work?
15. Direct vs. Indirect
• consequences depend on the changes to an individual or to a social
system occurring in immediate response to an innovation or as a second-
order result of the direct consequences of an innovation
• Did the innovation work as it was “expected” to work?
16. Anticipated vs. Unanticipated
• consequences depend on changes being recognized and intended by
members of a social system
• Did it work like others thought it would?
17. Consequences
• Change agents expect desirable consequences
• Change agents can often predict form and function
• However, meaning is less predictable
Editor's Notes
In applying the diffusion of innovation theory, it is important to understand potential adopters and their decision-making process. Important factors in decision making include who makes the decision, and whether the decision is made freely and implemented voluntarily. Based on these considerations, three types of innovation decisions have been identified:
There are four types of innovation decision. They are authority, optional, and collective.
Two factors determine what type a particular decision is:
Whether the decision is made freely and implemented voluntarily
Who makes the decision.
Based on these considerations, three types of innovation-decisions have been identified.
Collective Innovation-Decision made collectively by all participants.
Optional Innovation-Decision made by an individual who is in some way distinguished from others.
Authority Innovation-Decision made for the entire social system by individuals in positions of influence or power.
Optional innovation decision: This is made by an individual who is in some way distinguished from others in a social system.
Collective innovation decision: This is made collectively by all individuals of a social system.
Authority innovation decision: This is made for the entire social system by a few individuals in positions of influence or power.
Optional Innovation- Decision
The optional innovation decisions are choices to adopt or reject an innovation that are made by an individual independent of the decisions of the other system’s members.
But the individual’s decision may be influenced by the norms of the system and by communication through interpersonal networks.
The distinctive aspect of this decision is that the individual is the unit of decision making, rather than the social system.
Optional decisions can casually be made more rapidly than collective decisions.
Collective Innovation- Decision This decision is made by collectively all individuals of a social system. or It is made in agreement with other system members
Stages in Collective Decision- Making
Stimulation – of interest in the need for the new idea (by stimulator)
2. Initiation – of the new idea in the social system ( by initiators)
3. Legitimation – of the idea in the social system ( by legitimizer)
4. Decision – to act ( by members of the social system)
5. Action or execution of the new idea.
Participation in Collective Decisions At the forth stage in the collective decision-making process, the focus is upon the decision to act by members of the social system. It includes, Participation Satisfaction Member acceptance of collective decisions Member cohesion
Participation:- Participation plays a major role in the decision to act. Participation is the degree to which members of a social system are involved in the decision – making process.
Satisfaction & Participation:- Satisfaction is based on the type of participation. Perceived participation - In this participation, the members perceived that their leaders were not very competent in decision making. Objective participation – In this participation ,his degree of participation is judged by others. Perceived participation is taken as more important than objective participation.
Member Acceptance of Collective Decisions:- The average member of a social system has an important role to play in collective decisions. After a system’ legitimizers have ruled on the innovation, it is up to the members to accept or reject that decision. But this acceptance-rejection decision by members is not strictly equal to series of optional decision, because it is based on the member’s relationship with social system & their degree of participation in the decision –making process.
Member Acceptance and Cohesion:- Not only does member acceptance of collective decisions vary with participation but also with the degree to which the individual perceives himself to be attached to the group. Member acceptance of collective decision is positively related to member cohesion with the social system. Group pressures to change beliefs or behaviour will be more strongly felt but those most attached to the group.
1.Authority Innovation Decisions:
Authority decisions which are forced upon an individual by someone in a super ordinate power position.
This decision is made for the entire social system by few individuals in positions of influence or power.
There are at least two kinds of units involved in authority innovation – decision. 1. The adoption unit – which is an individual, group, or other unit adopts the innovation. 2.The decision unit – which is an individual, Group or other unit that has a position of higher authority than the adoption unit and which makes the final decision as to whether the adoption unit will adopt or reject the innovation.
Characteristics of Authority Innovation-Decision
The individual is not free to exercise his choice in adopting or rejecting an innovation.
b) Decision-making and adopting are activities of two separate individual or units.
c) The decision unit occupies a position of higher authority in the social system than the adoption unit.
d) Because of this hierarchical relationship between the DU and the AU, the decision unit can force the adoption unit to conform its decision.
Contingent Innovation Decision:
It is a choice to adopt or reject which can be made only after a prior innovation –decision.
For example a decision to cultivate tobacco, can be made by a farmer, only after getting permission from the Tobacco Board.
It indicates an optional decision that follows a authority decision but other sequential combination of two or more of the three types of innovation –decision can also constitute a contingent decision.
There are both positive and negative outcomes when an individual or organization chooses to adopt a particular innovation. In her article, “Integrating Models of Diffusion of Innovations,” Barbara Wejnert details two categories for consequences: public and private. Public consequences refer to the impact of an innovation on those other than the actor, while private consequences refer to the impact on the actor itself. Public consequences are usually concerned with issues of societal well-being, while private consequences are usually concerned with the improvement of quality of life or the reform of social structures.
